DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
MEH
Docket No. 354-10
1 Nov 10
This is in reference to your application for correction of naval
record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24
November 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed
in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material
considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with
all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board
considered the advisory opinions furnished by SJA memo of 21 May 10, a
copy of which is attached.
The Board also considered your request for a personal appearance,
however it found that the issues in the case were adequately
documented and that a personal appearance would not materially add to
the Board's understanding of the issues involved. Thus, your request
for a personal appearance has been denied.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record,
the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. In
this connection the Board substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinion provided by the Naval Academy SJA’s
office. The Board found there was no injustice in the decision to
disenroll you from the Naval Academy and there was no error or
injustice in the decision to require full reimbursement for the
educational costs expended on your behalf.
The Board found that the regulations governing your attendance at the
Naval Academy provide that a Midshipman who fails to complete the
program requirements shall, at the discretion of the Secretary of the
Navy, either serve on active duty for a specified period or reimburse
the United States for the educational assistance it has provided
towards the Midshipman’s education.
Docket No. 354-10
In such cases, the Secretary of the Navy has the discretion to render
a case-by-case determination as to whether the reimbursement
requirement and/or the enlisted service requirement should be waived
due to mitigating circumstances.
In your case, fern) Ca Assistant Secretary of the Navy
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs), acting on behalf of the Secretary of
the Navy, approved your disenrollment from the Naval Academy and
directed repayment of educational assistance on 9 March 2005. The
Board found no compelling reason to disturb ay decision.
The Board gave due consideration to the evidence and arguments made in
your application, including your arguments that your disenrollment for
“insufficient aptitude” (vice “unsatisfactory conduct”) was erroneous.
However, after review of all the evidence, the Board found that your
disenrollment was just, under the circumstances, and any such error,
if it exists, would not create an injustice in the decision to require
full reimbursement of educational costs. You received substantial
education at government expense before your disenrollment. You were
disenrolled for legitimate reasons before completing your Naval
Academy education. After your disenrollment, you were able to
graduate from the University of Texas and find meaningful employment.
You have benefitted and been enriched from the education you received
at government expense while the government has not received the
benefit of your service after your disenrollment. The Board finds
that, in light of the educational benefit you received, the
regulations implementing the Naval Academy program, and the terms of
your agreement, it is not an error or an injustice for the Secretary
of the Navy to require reimbursement of the costs expended by the
United States for your education. The Board also finds that a waiver
of the reimbursement of those costs is not warranted under the
circumstances. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board
reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence
or other matter not previously considered by the Board.* In this
regard, it is also important to keep in mind that a presumption of
regularity attaches to all official records.
'The Board notes that you have expressed interest in possible future service
in the United States Marine Corps. Should you elect, in the future, to serve
on active duty in any of the branches of the armed forces, you should reapply
to this Board for further consideration.
2
Docket No. 354-10
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of
probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
lo |
W. DEAN PF
Executive Dir
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09247-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2009. The Board finds that, in light of the educational benefit you received, the regulations implementing the NROTC program and the terms of the scholarship agreement, it is not an error or an injustice for the Secretary of the Navy to require reimbursement Docket No. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03176-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2009. The Board finds that, in light of the educational benefit you received, the regulations implementing the NROTC program and the terms of the scholarship agreement, it is mot an error or an injustice for the Secretary of the Navy to require reimbursement of the costs expended by the United States for your education. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04440-99
In your application you are requesting that you not be required to repay the cost of your education at the USNA. further administrative consideration of your case by submitting your resignation, and you admitted guilt in your resignation letter. There is no evidence in the record, and you have However, you precluded any It is Concerning the decision to waive recoupment of educational costs for Mr. 0 in 1996 despite his use of LSD, the Board determined that this waiver action resulted from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07773-10
On or about 13 March 2006, you appeared before a Performance Review Board {PRB} convened to inquire into your aptitude and performance. In the Board's view, your request to disenroll was a voluntary decision made of your own free will. Docket No._7773-10 were aware that you could continue in the NROTC program as well.?
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02442-99
authorized in cases involving homosexual conduct when the Like other separation cases, recoupment is member has failed to complete his service either voluntarily or because of misconduct. the case. It is also clear to the Board that the charges against Petitioner were based mainly on alleged homosexual conduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04663-01
Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director Enclosures DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 4663-01 2 April 2003 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD 0 ~mIuu-.m”~ Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. In response to congressional interest in Petitioner’s case, Headquarters Marine Corps stated, in part, as follows: ... On September 22, 1999, (Petitioner)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011234C070208
The applicant’s cadet records are not available to the Board. Gears failed to complete the period of active duty specified in his Agreement with the Navy. Had the applicant maintained the Army's weight standard, it could be argued he would have passed the 2-mile run event.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06277-07
6277-07 17 Dec 07This is in reference to your client’sapplication for correction of naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your client’s application on 17 December 2007. In addition, the Board considered the advisory Opinion furnished by NPC memo 1920 SER 834/026 of 28 Aug 07, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01261-08
A three-member panel of the Board for|Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your clients’ application on 24 November 2008. Your client is entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03398-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative of this regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. On 4 January 1994 you accepted an appointment as a midshipman at the Navy Reserve Officer Training Corps (NROTC) unit at the Georgia Institute of Technology. ...